DOCSLIB.ORG

Commit (Name and Define Felony) Within the [Dwelling House] [Sleeping Apartment]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Commit (Name and Define Felony) Within the [Dwelling House] [Sleeping Apartment] Page 1 of 3 N.C.P.I.—Criminal 214.10 FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY COVERING SECOND DEGREE BURGLARY, FELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AND NONFELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AS LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES FELONIES, MISDEMEANOR. G.S. 14-51; 14-52; 14-54 General Criminal Volume Replacement June 2011 The defendant has been charged with first degree burglary, which is breaking and entering in the nighttime of another person’s occupied [dwelling house] [room used as a sleeping apartment] without that person’s consent, and with the intent to commit (name felony). For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must prove five things beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that the defendant broke1 and entered2 a [dwelling house3] [sleeping apartment]. 4 Second, that the breaking and entering was during the nighttime. Third, that at the time of the breaking and entering the [dwelling house] [sleeping apartment] was occupied. Fourth, that the [owner] [tenant] did not consent to the breaking and entering. And Fifth, that at the time of the breaking and entering the defendant intended to 5 commit (name and define felony) within the [dwelling house] [sleeping apartment]. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the alleged date, the defendant broke into and entered an occupied [dwelling house] [sleeping apartment] 1 If the breaking is not actual, but falls into the category of a "constructive" breaking, the trial judge should use an additional explanation, such as: "A breaking need not be actual; that is, the person breaking need not physically remove the barrier himself. He may, by a threat of force (such as threatening to burn down the structure into which entry is sought), inspire such fear as to induce the occupant to allow him to enter. He may, by some trick or fraudulent representation (such as pretending to be a repairman), cause someone in the structure to open an entry to him. In any of these situations, the defendant would have constructively broken, and such constructive breaking is as sufficient a breaking for the purposes of this offense as any physical removal by the defendant of a barrier to entry." 2 If the entry is disputed, the judge should use an additional explanation such as entry of [any portion of the body] [any implement under the defendant's control entered into the premises] would constitute an entry. 3 In State v. Green, 305 N.C. 463 (1982), the court held that the definition of a dwelling house is not limited to the house proper but rather includes within it not only the house in which the owner or renter and his family, or any member of it, may live and sleep, but all other houses appurtenant thereto, and used as part and parcel thereof, such as a kitchen, smokehouse, and the like, provided they are within the curtilage or are adjacent to or very near to the dwelling house. 4 If there is doubt as to whether it was nighttime, the jury should be told: "The law considers it to be nighttime when it is so dark that a person’s face cannot be identified except by artificial light or moonlight." 5 At this juncture, the crime that the defendant allegedly intended to commit should be briefly defined, e.g., "Larceny is the taking and carrying away of the personal property of another without that person’s consent with the intent to deprive that person of possession permanently." Failure to define the crime may constitute reversible error. S. v. Elliot, 21 N.C. App. 555 (1974). Page 2 of 3 N.C.P.I.—Criminal 214.10 FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY COVERING SECOND DEGREE BURGLARY, FELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AND NONFELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AS LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES FELONIES, MISDEMEANOR. G.S. 14-51; 14-52; 14-54 General Criminal Volume Replacement June 2011 without the [owner's] [tenant's] consent, during the nighttime, and at that time intended to commit (name felony) therein, it would be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of first degree burglary. If you do not so find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things, 6 you will not return a verdict of guilty of first degree burglary, but would consider whether the defendant is guilty of second degree burglary. Second degree burglary differs from first degree burglary in that the State need not prove that the structure involved was occupied at the time 7 of the burglary. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the alleged date, the defendant broke and entered a [dwelling house] [sleeping apartment] [house within the curtilage of a dwelling house] [building in which a room is used as a sleeping apartment] without the consent of the [owner] [tenant], during the nighttime, and at that time intended to commit (name felony) therein, it would be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of second degree burglary. If you do not so find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things, 8 you will not return a verdict of guilty of second degree burglary, but would consider whether the defendant is guilty of felonious breaking or entering. Felonious breaking or entering differs from burglary in that both a breaking and an entry are not necessary. Either a breaking or an entry is 9 enough. Furthermore, the building that was involved need not have been a [dwelling house] [sleeping apartment], and the breaking or entry need not have been in the nighttime. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the alleged date, the defendant [broke into] [entered] [broke into and entered] a building without the 6 If there is to be no instruction on lesser included offenses, the last phrase should be: ". it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty." 7 Instructions on lesser included offenses should only be used when appropriate. 8 If there is to be no instruction on lesser included offenses, the last phrase should be: ". it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty." 9 G.S. 14-54(c) states that "building shall be construed to include any dwelling, dwelling house, uninhabited house, building under construction, building within the curtilage of a dwelling house, or any other structure designed to house or secure within it any activity or property." Page 3 of 3 N.C.P.I.—Criminal 214.10 FIRST DEGREE BURGLARY COVERING SECOND DEGREE BURGLARY, FELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AND NONFELONIOUS BREAKING OR ENTERING AS LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES FELONIES, MISDEMEANOR. G.S. 14-51; 14-52; 14-54 General Criminal Volume Replacement June 2011 consent of the [owner] [tenant], intending at that time to commit (name felony) therein, it would be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of felonious breaking or entering. If you do not so find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things, you will not return a 10 verdict of guilty of felonious breaking or entering, but would consider whether the defendant is guilty of non-felonious breaking or entering. Non-felonious breaking or entering differs from felonious breaking or entering in that it need not be done with the intent to commit a felony so long as the breaking or entering was wrongful, that is, without any claim of right. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the alleged date, the defendant wrongfully [broke into] [entered] [broke into and entered] another person's building without that person’s consent, it would be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of non- felonious breaking or entering. If you do not so find or if you have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things, it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty. 10 If there is to be no instruction on lesser included offenses, that last phrase should be: ". it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty." .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Legal Term for Cheating on Wife
    Legal Term For Cheating On Wife Is Vassili regular or crackpot after concupiscent Noe generate so awhile? Affordable Gordie untidies very round while Spike remains unbreeched and inspired. How peristomatic is Preston when hard-fisted and prepubescent Wit cackle some underbridge? The unsatisfied spouse cheated on discrimination is attorney for worry, wife on incurable insanity of up until they help When your spouse must be responsible for me at times, the terms favorable settlement. Cultural factors are legal questions are legal term. The intensity that in the outcome of the obligation. You from your letter, on legal term for cheating wife was the dependent spouse wins! We are legal action for legal cheating on wife. Child custody of legal term adultery is something to have terms you ask for you from voluntarily engages in this url into account. Focusing on your spouse cheats does not carry out. This is for spousal support. Imagine your reality, but a number of a petition seeking a person other. To legal term for my wife must show his. If you cheated with someone cheating wife cheats his legal term for adultery, is natural to you and think about outside in terms of. He finishes the similarities between a divorce case law may change their own home to a cheating on wife for legal term relationship to one of trust and pay in the original concept. If one does adultery laws that, it makes people cheat on your marital property. This cheating wife cheats his affection is termed in terms have. That one of. Our sleeves and harmony with your wife cheated with a relationship, emotional infidelity is.
    [Show full text]
  • The Unnecessary Crime of Conspiracy
    California Law Review VOL. 61 SEPTEMBER 1973 No. 5 The Unnecessary Crime of Conspiracy Phillip E. Johnson* The literature on the subject of criminal conspiracy reflects a sort of rough consensus. Conspiracy, it is generally said, is a necessary doctrine in some respects, but also one that is overbroad and invites abuse. Conspiracy has been thought to be necessary for one or both of two reasons. First, it is said that a separate offense of conspiracy is useful to supplement the generally restrictive law of attempts. Plot- ters who are arrested before they can carry out their dangerous schemes may be convicted of conspiracy even though they did not go far enough towards completion of their criminal plan to be guilty of attempt.' Second, conspiracy is said to be a vital legal weapon in the prosecu- tion of "organized crime," however defined.' As Mr. Justice Jackson put it, "the basic conspiracy principle has some place in modem crimi- nal law, because to unite, back of a criniinal purpose, the strength, op- Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley. A.B., Harvard Uni- versity, 1961; J.D., University of Chicago, 1965. 1. The most cogent statement of this point is in Note, 14 U. OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW REv. 56, 61-62 (1956): "Since we are fettered by an unrealistic law of criminal attempts, overbalanced in favour of external acts, awaiting the lit match or the cocked and aimed pistol, the law of criminal conspiracy has been em- ployed to fill the gap." See also MODEL PENAL CODE § 5.03, Comment at 96-97 (Tent.
    [Show full text]
  • A Distributive Theory of Criminal Law
    William & Mary Law Review Volume 52 (2010-2011) Issue 1 Article 2 October 2010 A Distributive Theory of Criminal Law Aya Gruber [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Criminal Law Commons Repository Citation Aya Gruber, A Distributive Theory of Criminal Law, 52 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1 (2010), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol52/iss1/2 Copyright c 2010 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr William and Mary Law Review VOLUME 52 NO. 1, 2010 A DISTRIBUTIVE THEORY OF CRIMINAL LAW AYA GRUBER* ABSTRACT In criminal law circles, the accepted wisdom is that there are two and only two true justifications of punishmentretributivism and utilitarianism. The multitude of moral claims about punishment may thus be reduced to two propositions: (1) punishment should be imposed because defendants deserve it, and (2) punishment should be imposed because it makes society safer. At the same time, most penal scholars notice the trend in criminal law to de-emphasize intent, centralize harm, and focus on victims, but they largely write off this trend as an irrational return to antiquated notions of vengeance. This Article asserts that there is in fact a distributive logic to the changes in current criminal law. The distributive theory of criminal law holds that an offender ought to be punished, not because he is culpable or because punishment increases net security, but because punishment appropriately distributes pleasure and pain between the offender and victim.
    [Show full text]
  • Penal Code Offenses by Punishment Range Office of the Attorney General 2
    PENAL CODE BYOFFENSES PUNISHMENT RANGE Including Updates From the 85th Legislative Session REV 3/18 Table of Contents PUNISHMENT BY OFFENSE CLASSIFICATION ........................................................................... 2 PENALTIES FOR REPEAT AND HABITUAL OFFENDERS .......................................................... 4 EXCEPTIONAL SENTENCES ................................................................................................... 7 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 4 ................................................................................................. 8 INCHOATE OFFENSES ........................................................................................................... 8 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 5 ............................................................................................... 11 OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON ....................................................................................... 11 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 6 ............................................................................................... 18 OFFENSES AGAINST THE FAMILY ......................................................................................... 18 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 7 ............................................................................................... 20 OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY .......................................................................................... 20 CLASSIFICATION OF TITLE 8 ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Why Misprision of a Felony Is Not a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
    DePaul Law Review Volume 69 Issue 1 Fall 2019 Article 5 Misapprising Misprision: Why Misprision Of A Felony Is Not A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude Alexandra Carl Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Alexandra Carl, Misapprising Misprision: Why Misprision Of A Felony Is Not A Crime Involving Moral Turpitude, 69 DePaul L. Rev. 143 (2020) Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol69/iss1/5 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in DePaul Law Review by an authorized editor of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\D\DPL\69-1\DPL105.txt unknown Seq: 1 5-FEB-20 12:14 MISAPPRISING MISPRISION: WHY MISPRISION OF A FELONY IS NOT A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE INTRODUCTION Immigration is an area of American law in which archaic terminol- ogy and hyper-technical statutory interpretation collide with human lives. The results can be arbitrary, absurd, or tragic. Noncitizens’ be- havior is scrutinized, categorized, and judged according to different standards than those that citizens must meet or even consider, and the consequences can be disproportionately devastating. One illustrative example is the immigration law term “crime involving moral turpi- tude” (CIMT). This antiquated term is not officially defined, nor does any list of crimes definitively involving moral turpitude exist. There are no “crimes involving moral turpitude” outside of immigration law, so citizens never need to evaluate whether their behavior may or may not be legally turpitudinous.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Felony Murder Rule: Purpose and Effect
    The American Felony Murder Rule: Purpose and Effect Daniel Ganz 21090905 UC Berkeley, Spring 2012 Legal Studies Honors Thesis Supervised by Professor Richard Perry Ganz 1 I. Abstract Most US states have a felony murder rule, which allows prosecutors to charge felons with murder for any death that occurs during and because of the commission of the felony. This allows the felon to be convicted with murder without requiring the prosecution to prove the mens rea that would otherwise be necessary for a murder conviction. Much of the legal scholarship indicates that the purpose of the felony murder rule is to deter felonies and to make felons limit their use of violence while they're committing the felony by making the felon internalize more fully the negative consequences of their actions. It's unclear whether legislatures that adopt felony murder rules are more concerned with deterring criminal behavior or making criminals less violent when committing felonies. We analyze judicial decisions to infer what judges believed were the intentions of the legislatures that adopted felony murder statutes. We also use regression analysis to determine whether felony murder statutes are correlated with lower crime rates or lower rates of the average number of deaths that occur during felonies. We do this both by modeling felony rates and rates of felony- related deaths as a function of whether a state has a felony murder rule, and by determining how felony rates and rates of felony-related deaths change when a state adopts or abolishes a felony murder rule. Our results indicate that the felony murder rule does not have a significant effect on crime rates or crime-related death rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of a Sample of Felony Offenses
    NORTH CAROLINA SENTENCING AND POLICY ADVISORY COMMISSION CLASSIFICATION OF A SAMPLE OF OFFENSES (Effective 12/1/17) CLASS A FELONIES Maximum Punishment of Death or Life Without Parole First-Degree Murder. (14-17) CLASS B1 FELONIES Maximum Punishment of Life Without Parole First-Degree Forcible Sexual Offense. (14-27.26)/First-Degree Second-Degree Murder. (14-17(b)) Statutory Sexual Offense. (14-27.29) First-Degree Forcible Rape. (14-27.21)/First-Degree Statutory Rape (14-27.24) CLASS B2 FELONIES Maximum Punishment of 484* Months Second-Degree Murder. (14-17(b)(1) and (2)) CLASS C FELONIES Maximum Punishment of 231* Months Second-Degree Forcible Rape. (14-27.22) First-Degree Kidnapping. (14-39) Second-Degree Forcible Sexual Offense. (14-27.27) Embezzlement (amount involved $100,000 or more). (14-90) Assault W/D/W/I/K/I/S/I. (14-32(a)) CLASS D FELONIES Maximum Punishment of 204* Months Voluntary Manslaughter. (14-18) Child Abuse Inflicting Serious Physical Injury. (14-318.4(a)) First-Degree Burglary. (14-51) Death by Vehicle. (20-141.4(a)(1)) First-Degree Arson. (14-58) Sell or Deliver a Controlled Substance to a Person Under 16 But Armed Robbery. (14-87) More than 13 Years of Age. (90-95(e)(5)) CLASS E FELONIES Maximum Punishment of 88* Months Sexual Activity by a Substitute Parent or Custodian. (14-27.31) Assault with a Firearm on a Law Enforcement Officer. (14-34.5) Assault W/D/W/I/S/I. (14-32(b)) Second-Degree Kidnapping. (14-39) Assault W/D/W/I/K.
    [Show full text]
  • Misprison of Felony
    South Carolina Law Review Volume 6 Issue 1 Article 8 Fall 9-1-1953 Misprison of Felony E. L. Morgan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/sclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation E. Lee Morgan, Misprison of Felony, 6 S.C.L.R. 87. (1953). This Note is brought to you by the Law Reviews and Journals at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in South Carolina Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Morgan: Misprison of Felony MISPRISION OF FELONY Misprision1 of felony has been defined in various ways, but per- haps its best definition is as follows: "Misprision of felony at common law is a criminal neglect either to prevent a felony from being committed or to bring the offender to justice after its com- mission, but without such previous concert with or subsequent assis- tance of him as will make the concealer an accessory before or after 12 the fact." In the modern use of the term, misprision of felony has been said to be almost, if not identically, the same offense as that of an acces- sory after the fact.3 It has also been stated that misprision is nothing more than a word used to describe a misdemeanor which does not possess a specific name.4 It is that offense of concealing a felony committed by another, but without such previous concert with or subsequent assistance to the felon as would make the concealing party an accessory before or after the fact.5 Misprision is distinguished from compounding an offense on the basis of consideration or amends; misprision is a bare concealment of crime, while compounding is a concealment for a reward by one 6 directly injured by the crime.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Statutes Imposing Collateral Consequences Upon Conviction
    FEDERAL STATUTES IMPOSING COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES UPON CONVICTION DISCLAIMER This monograph highlights significant collateral consequences that are imposed by federal law upon conviction of a felony offense. It is provided for informational purposes only, as an aid to further inquiry. The views expressed in the monograph on questions of federal or state law do not necessarily represent the official position of the Department of Justice. The Office of the Pardon Attorney does not have operational responsibility for the interpretation or enforcement of the statutes cited in the monograph. Readers should therefore consult with the appropriate agency with operational responsibility for administering the statutory provision of interest for authoritative and more complete information. In addition, the research for the preparation of the monograph was completed by the early fall of 2000. Because laws are revised frequently, readers are cautioned that the information in this monograph may be out of date and that they should consult with the appropriate agency for more current information. We have not attempted to describe all the adverse legal consequences of a felony conviction, and do not cover in depth the adverse consequences of conviction of a crime other than a felony. In addition, although disabilities may attend being charged with or agreeing to pretrial diversion for a crime, we have not attempted to explore those issues or to define what is meant by Aconviction@ of a crime, which may vary from context to context. For example, a person may not be considered Aconvicted@ for some purposes until sentence is imposed. Further, the treatment of military convictions, juvenile adjudications, and convictions in foreign countries or tribal courts is not covered to any significant degree in this monograph.
    [Show full text]
  • § N.11 Burglary, Theft and Fraud
    Immigrant Legal Resource Center, www.ilrc.org § N.11 Burglary, Theft, Fraud January 2013 § N.11 Burglary, Theft and Fraud (For more information, see Defending Immigrants in the Ninth Circuit, Chapter 9, §§ 9.10, 9.13 and 9.35, www.ilrc.org/crimes) Table of Contents I. Overview II. Burglary: How to Avoid an Aggravated Felony and CIMT III. Theft: How to Avoid an Aggravated Felony and CIMT IV. Fraud or Deceit: How to Avoid an Aggravated Felony V. Review: When Does a CIMT Conviction Cause Inadmissibility or Deportability App. 13-1 Legal Summaries to Hand to Defendants I. OVERVIEW Burglary, theft and fraud convictions have two potential immigration consequences. They could constitute an aggravated felony conviction, in the categories of burglary, theft, or a crime of violence with a year’s sentence imposed, or fraud with a loss to the victim/s exceeding $10,000.1 In addition they can and frequently do constitute a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”).2 Including in felony cases, an informed criminal defender often can avoid conviction of an aggravated felony, the more serious immigration penalty, and sometimes can avoid a CIMT. A single offense has the potential to come within multiple adverse immigration categories, e.g. be an aggravated felony as burglary and as attempted theft. Check the offense against all immigration categories in this Note. The main defense strategies to avoid an aggravated felony in this area are: To avoid an aggravated felony for burglary or theft offenses, avoid a sentence imposed of one year or more on any single count.
    [Show full text]
  • 9Th Circ. Raises the Bar on Misprision of a Felony by Andrew Goldsmith
    Portfolio Media. Inc. | 111 West 19th Street, 5th Floor | New York, NY 10011 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | [email protected] 9th Circ. Raises The Bar On Misprision Of A Felony By Andrew Goldsmith Law360, New York (June 23, 2017, 12:28 PM EDT) -- When special counsel Robert Mueller began his work last month, he may have been surprised to learn the Ninth Circuit had added a new element to one of the potential crimes within his jurisdiction just two days before his appointment. In United States v. Olson, the court held that misprision of a felony requires a defendant to know the crime he or she is concealing is a felony.[1] Apparently, no other court has considered the possibility of such a requirement in the 227 years since the crime was codified. Despite this critical change, Olson gives little guidance on how to prove, for example, that a defendant knew that a private citizen could be sentenced to more than a year in prison for corresponding with a foreign government to influence that government or to undermine the United States. The Andrew Goldsmith potential implications are not limited to cases under the purview of the special counsel’s office. In cases involving low-level or little-known underlying felonies, this new element may convert the most widely applicable obstruction statute, carrying among the lowest sentences for such a crime, into the most difficult to prove. Misprision of a Felony English law recognized “a duty to raise the ‘hue and cry’ and report felonies to the authorities” as early as the 13th century.[2] The first Congress codified misprision in 1790, and today’s 18 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Felony Sentencing and Jail Characteristics
    u.s. Departmentof Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Felony Sentencing .. and J ail Characteristics iion Paper 142523 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this alII) dgla!tssd material has been gr~fic Domain/OJP /BJS u. S. De!)artment of Justice to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission (\f the ~wner. Felony Sentencing and Jail Characteristics John M. Dawson Bureau ofJustice Statistics Statistician June 1993, NCJ-142523 u.s. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Lawrence A. Greenfeld Acting Director The Bureau of Justice Statistics, an agency of the U.S. Department of Justice, is part of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. ii Felony Sentencing and Jail Characteristics '--------- -- -- -- -- - -- --- --- ----------- Foreword The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) introduced this series of discussion papers in February 1992 to promote the exchange of information, analyses, and ideas on issues related to justice statistics and the operations of criminal justice systems both domestically and abroad. In the future, BJS will address issues that arise from ongoing analyses of BJS statistical data but that are not covered in our standard Bulletins or Special or Technical Reports.
    [Show full text]